You think America is really so so bad? This will help you think again

[Alexis]

I believe that until quite recently Chinese archaeologists refused to excavate the mausoleum and its vicinity because in legend Qin Shi Huang was associated with so much bloodshed in getting together his empire that his name is associated with much evil. Apparently the Chinese viewed the mausoleum as a sort of gigantic Pandora's box: open it and all of that violence will be unleashed again. Disturb it and you will be cursed as will China.

Do you still think that those artifacts are not linked with anything dreadful Alexis?

Thanks, your comment draw me to look up a bit at Qin Shi Huang. I've learnt something

I note this Confucean judgment of Qin Shi Huang's reign:

The famous Han poet and statesman Jia Yi concluded his essay The Faults of Qin (過秦論, Guò Qín Lùn) with what was to become the standard Confucian judgment of the reasons for Qin's collapse. (...) Jia Yi wrote that:

Qin, from a tiny base, had become a great power, ruling the land and receiving homage from all quarters for a hundred odd years. Yet after they unified the land and secured themselves within the pass, a single common rustic could nevertheless challenge this empire... Why? Because the ruler lacked humaneness and rightness; because preserving power differs fundamentally from seizing power.

[Alexis]

For Europeans like us, it is almost unavoidable that a bunch of slant eyed, very rigid, very disciplined military personnel, will seem more threatening than people who look a lot like us, who are easy going and enjoy very much the same things we do, even if they live on the other side of the Atlantic and tend to be a bit ignorant about Europe...

Come on Sertorio, this is a strawman's argument and you know it.

No racism whatsoever in my reaction to vast armies in impeccable Prussian order answering a single man who is their unchallenged and lifetime Leader and swearing loyalty until death to his Party. This is a sketch that recalls Hitler or Stalin adressing their respective peoples. Do you think Germans or Russians have slant eyes?

If Donald Trump organized similar ceremonies with US forces - which he could not, he's a president not a dictator with totalitarian trend - wouldn't you also be repelled by the sight?

Note that this is a relatively new feature of PRC government. Previous first secretaries were chosen as prime bureaucrats and limit was imposed to the time they could keep their posts. Xi Jinping has removed those limits, at the same time when he imposed new limits to Chinese society (such as experiments about "social credit" Big Brother system, Muslim Uighrs in concentration camps for "reeducation" by the hundreds of thousands, enhanced repression of Christianity), purged the Party of all potential rivals with help of an "anti-corruption" campaign, proposed a nationalist drive for international power and tried to impose the idea that all of China's successes were his personal own!

So the evil Yellow people are a threat to us, and the good spirited Yankees are our eternal saviours... Unfortunately the stereotypes are very unhelpful, and the real threat to world peace comes in fact from the US, not from China... As we can see by the aggressiveness shown by the US against any country not willing to toe their line.

I've never said that Americans would be "our eternal saviours". Those are your words, not mine.

What I've said is that among the two superpowers of our time, one is taking a specially dangerous path.

Note that the US are still a democracy, they have vigorous internal debates, which is the guarantee that with time they will be able to improve on their errors. Like all the Portugal, France, India or Japan of this world... like democracies, which have built-in mechanisms for improvement.

China is going in the opposite direction, from a "simple" dictatorship with prosperity as its main objective back to some forms of totalitarianism (and will they stop?) with nationalism as motivation.

[Sertorio]

For Europeans like us, it is almost unavoidable that a bunch of slant eyed, very rigid, very disciplined military personnel, will seem more threatening than people who look a lot like us, who are easy going and enjoy very much the same things we do, even if they live on the other side of the Atlantic and tend to be a bit ignorant about Europe...

Come on Sertorio, this is a strawman's argument and you know it.

No racism whatsoever in my reaction to vast armies in impeccable Prussian order answering a single man who is their unchallenged and lifetime Leader and swearing loyalty until death to his Party. This is a sketch that recalls Hitler or Stalin adressing their respective peoples. Do you think Germans or Russians have slant eyes?

If Donald Trump organized similar ceremonies with US forces - which he could not, he's a president not a dictator with totalitarian trend - wouldn't you also be repelled by the sight?

Note that this is a relatively new feature of PRC government. Previous first secretaries were chosen as prime bureaucrats and limit was imposed to the time they could keep their posts. Xi Jinping has removed those limits, at the same time when he imposed new limits to Chinese society (such as experiments about "social credit" Big Brother system, Muslim Uighrs in concentration camps for "reeducation" by the hundreds of thousands, enhanced repression of Christianity), purged the Party of all potential rivals with help of an "anti-corruption" campaign, proposed a nationalist drive for international power and tried to impose the idea that all of China's successes were his personal own!

So the evil Yellow people are a threat to us, and the good spirited Yankees are our eternal saviours... Unfortunately the stereotypes are very unhelpful, and the real threat to world peace comes in fact from the US, not from China... As we can see by the aggressiveness shown by the US against any country not willing to toe their line.

I've never said that Americans would be "our eternal saviours". Those are your words, not mine.

What I've said is that among the two superpowers of our time, one is taking a specially dangerous path.

Note that the US are still a democracy, they have vigorous internal debates, which is the guarantee that with time they will be able to improve on their errors. Like all the Portugal, France, India or Japan of this world... like democracies, which have built-in mechanisms for improvement.

China is going in the opposite direction, from a "simple" dictatorship with prosperity as its main objective back to some forms of totalitarianism (and will they stop?) with nationalism as motivation.

China has become the greatest - or second greatest - economy in the world. China has more PhD than the US, and contributes now with the largest amount of scientific papers in the scientific community. They are the heirs to a 5,000 year civilization and were deeply humiliated by the Western powers in the 19th century. They are daily challenged by a 200 year old upstart which dares to tell them what they can or cannot do with one of their provinces - Taiwan - which most countries in the world recognize is part of the PRC. It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do. China's military assertiveness is the logical result of that determination. We are entitled to being somewhat concerned about this assertiveness, but we certainly should not take sides in the growing conflict between China and the US. The US has no business in Asia, and should refrain from acting there as if they were the protectors of everybody against China. A more democratic regime in China is only possible if China does not feel it is being encircled by potential enemies under the orders of the US.

[SteveFoerster]

China has become the greatest - or second greatest - economy in the world. China has more PhD than the US, and contributes now with the largest amount of scientific papers in the scientific community.

It's worth noting that outside the C9 League, the quality of their higher education institutions is thought to be rather dubious, and the quality of their scholarly papers is

Numbers of PhD holders and scholarly papers may be a very misleading approximation for technological progress in this case.

(I'm not being a hater, I agree that they're definitely taking university development seriously, but that's not something you can rush, and the lack of academic freedom there isn't helping.)

They are the heirs to a 5,000 year civilization and were deeply humiliated by the Western powers in the 19th century. They are daily challenged by a 200 year old upstart which dares to tell them what they can or cannot do with one of their provinces - Taiwan - which most countries in the world recognize is part of the PRC.

And most of the world recognized that Tibet wasn't, or that Crimea was part of Ukraine. But that seems to be a distinction you can make only when it's convenient.

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do. China's military assertiveness is the logical result of that determination. We are entitled to being somewhat concerned about this assertiveness, but we certainly should not take sides in the growing conflict between China and the US. The US has no business in Asia, and should refrain from acting there as if they were the protectors of everybody against China. A more democratic regime in China is only possible if China does not feel it is being encircled by potential enemies under the orders of the US.

And yet you're delighted when the Chinese and Russians are active in the Caribbean Sea.

If the Vietnamese of all people are glad to see U.S. involvement in the region, that says that China's neighbours are a hell of lot more scared of them than you are. Of course, you're safely 11000 kilometres away....

[Sertorio]

They are the heirs to a 5,000 year civilization and were deeply humiliated by the Western powers in the 19th century. They are daily challenged by a 200 year old upstart which dares to tell them what they can or cannot do with one of their provinces - Taiwan - which most countries in the world recognize is part of the PRC.

And most of the world recognized that Tibet wasn't, or that Crimea was part of Ukraine. But that seems to be a distinction you can make only when it's convenient.

Crimea and the Ukraine are not a Chinese issue, and we are discussing here solely China. In any case you should not forget that the Crimeans voted overwhelmingly for reunification with Russia, and that at least one of the major Taiwanese parties, the Kuomintang, recognizes that Taiwan is a part of China. But I suppose that the Taiwanese should be allowed to decide, by referendum, whether they want to be part of China or independent

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do. China's military assertiveness is the logical result of that determination. We are entitled to being somewhat concerned about this assertiveness, but we certainly should not take sides in the growing conflict between China and the US. The US has no business in Asia, and should refrain from acting there as if they were the protectors of everybody against China. A more democratic regime in China is only possible if China does not feel it is being encircled by potential enemies under the orders of the US.

And yet you're delighted when the Chinese and Russians are active in the Caribbean Sea.

I have never shown any delight at such activity. But I recognize the right of Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba asking for Russian and Chinese economic assistance, in view of US sanctions against those countries.

If the Vietnamese of all people are glad to see U.S. involvement in the region, that says that China's neighbours are a hell of lot more scared of them than you are. Of course, you're safely 11000 kilometres away....

How do you know the Vietnamese are so delighted? And have they asked US assistance against China?...

[neverfail]

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do.

Yes, China was humiliated back in the 19th century and invited that humiliation repeatedly upon itself - if only because it had such an exaggerated view of its own strength (and importance) compared to that of the foreign devils. it was challenged to contend with. I have no sympathy for it.

China's military assertiveness is the logical result of that determination.

No, it is not! No one has attempted to "humiliate" China since the end of the Second World War. Their new found military assertiveness reflects nothing other than the ambitions of its new "president for life" (dictator).

The very same hubris that led Manchu China into conflict with the Western powers is apparently leading Communist China into renewed conflict with The West.

[neverfail]

I believe that until quite recently Chinese archaeologists refused to excavate the mausoleum and its vicinity because in legend Qin Shi Huang was associated with so much bloodshed in getting together his empire that his name is associated with much evil. Apparently the Chinese viewed the mausoleum as a sort of gigantic Pandora's box: open it and all of that violence will be unleashed again. Disturb it and you will be cursed as will China.

Do you still think that those artifacts are not linked with anything dreadful Alexis?

Thanks, your comment draw me to look up a bit at Qin Shi Huang. I've learnt something

You are most welcome.

I note this Confucean judgment of Qin Shi Huang's reign:

The famous Han poet and statesman Jia Yi concluded his essay The Faults of Qin (過秦論, Guò Qín Lùn) with what was to become the standard Confucian judgment of the reasons for Qin's collapse. (...) Jia Yi wrote that:

Qin, from a tiny base, had become a great power, ruling the land and receiving homage from all quarters for a hundred odd years. Yet after they unified the land and secured themselves within the pass, a single common rustic could nevertheless challenge this empire... Why? Because the ruler lacked humaneness and rightness; because preserving power differs fundamentally from seizing power.

He unified China into its very first prototype of the unitary imperial state it was destined to become thereafter. Yet it would seem that then as ever since the Chinese peoples have never been grateful to him for it. That is probably the reason why.

[Sertorio]

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do.

Yes, China was humiliated back in the 19th century and invited that humiliation repeatedly upon itself - if only because it had such an exaggerated view of its own strength (and importance) compared to that of the foreign devils. it was challenged to contend with. I have no sympathy for it.

Would you care to explain such a preposterous claim?... How did China "invite" humiliation upon itself, and who gave the western powers the right to intervene in China's internal affairs?...

[neverfail]

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do.

Yes, China was humiliated back in the 19th century and invited that humiliation repeatedly upon itself - if only because it had such an exaggerated view of its own strength (and importance) compared to that of the foreign devils. it was challenged to contend with. I have no sympathy for it.

Would you care to explain such a preposterous claim?... How did China "invite" humiliation upon itself, and who gave the western powers the right to intervene in China's internal affairs?...

No, I would not care to do so! Since you consider my claim to be "preposterous'" then it is clear that any additional commentary I would care to post would not be met by a receptive mind.

[Sertorio]

It is understandable that the Chinese leaders have decided that never again will they allow foreign powers to humiliate them or tell them what to do.

Yes, China was humiliated back in the 19th century and invited that humiliation repeatedly upon itself - if only because it had such an exaggerated view of its own strength (and importance) compared to that of the foreign devils. it was challenged to contend with. I have no sympathy for it.

Would you care to explain such a preposterous claim?... How did China "invite" humiliation upon itself, and who gave the western powers the right to intervene in China's internal affairs?...

No, I would not care to do so! Since you consider my claim to be "preposterous'" then it is clear that any additional commentary I would care to post would not be met by a receptive mind.

Nice dodge, but unconvincing...